Your most unpopular Golf opinions?

[Foxx]

15 holes of golf is adequate.

It would solve the time issue and give land back to squeezed golf clubs to do other improvements.

Edited January 29, 2024 by Foxx

[akronswitness]

That golf courses should be held responsible for teaching the influx of new players what golf etiquette is--not the guy screaming at the foursome in front of him who are pace for a 5 1/2 hour round.

[jda]

That golf is one of the easiest sports out there.  Everybody has their own ball, nobody is playing defense, the ball is not moving and everybody can make a birdie.

 

Swing hard.  If you are going to hit a bad shot, hit it closer to the hole.

 

Volunteer to help a local high school golf team if you really want to learn how to golf.

 

Complaining about pace of play is as dumb as complaining about politics or rush hour traffic... except you can do more about pace of play.  Everybody knows when play is going to be slow so either play another time or live with it.

[PuffyC]

Probably already mentioned multiple times but:

 

Golfers believe more old wives tales and other voodoo nonsense regarding their equipment than any other. By a lot. 

 

Golf is the only sport where many who play it have meltdowns if they can't get it over with as quickly as possible.

[akronswitness]

3 hours ago, PuffyC said:

 

Golf is the only sport where many who play it have meltdowns if they can't get it over with as quickly as possible.

 

Im going to get looked at crazy for this but here it goes.....

 

I think that goes back to the burnout issue of 18 holes. For a lot of golfers 18 holes is a endurance and attention span test just as much as it is a fun skill test of your game. Doing anything for 5 hours is a looong time, regardless of how enjoyable it is for you. I love to play video games, couldn't play them for 5 hours straight. I love to eat good food, couldn't sit at a restaurant for 5 hours. I love baseball, couldn't watch a 5 hour long game without losing my mind. I love se......you get the point.

 

I think the attention span and ability to focus on any one particular activity continuously is around 3 hrs and anything more is too much of a good thing and people lose interest or become fatigued. That's why movies are 2-3 hours long, that's why sporting events are 2-3 hours long, ect. So if I played with a partner, had nobody in front of us and could play a 3 hour round of golf it would be amazing--but you spend on average 1.5-2 hours per round sitting idle not playing. A lot of people end up getting burned out by hole 13-14. Not every time but often enough for it to be noticable.

 

I've had this conversation with others too that public golf should be 14 hole courses and 18 holes reserved for 'tour courses' or country clubs. Many of them agreed because 14 holes is the 3-ish hour mark when playing in a foursome--that's typically where the slog begins for a lot of amature golfers to finish 18 and stay engaged especially when your not playing well.

 

 

Edited January 31, 2024 by akronswitness

[PuffyC]

Totally get that, and 3 hour rounds are definitely better than the ones that take 5. But I’m good hanging out on the course with buddies all day if that’s what it is. I’d happily spend all day playing 36 if I had the energy 😉

[PedronNiall]

3 hours ago, akronswitness said:

 

Im going to get looked at crazy for this but here it goes.....

 

I think that goes back to the burnout issue of 18 holes. For a lot of golfers 18 holes is a endurance and attention span test just as much as it is a fun skill test of your game. Doing anything for 5 hours is a looong time, regardless of how enjoyable it is for you. I love to play video games, couldn't play them for 5 hours straight. I love to eat good food, couldn't sit at a restaurant for 5 hours. I love baseball, couldn't watch a 5 hour long game without losing my mind. I love se......you get the point.

 

I think the attention span and ability to focus on any one particular activity continuously is around 3 hrs and anything more is too much of a good thing and people lose interest or become fatigued. That's why movies are 2-3 hours long, that's why sporting events are 2-3 hours long, ect. So if I played with a partner, had nobody in front of us and could play a 3 hour round of golf it would be amazing--but you spend on average 1.5-2 hours per round sitting idle not playing. A lot of people end up getting burned out by hole 13-14. Not every time but often enough for it to be noticable.

 

I've had this conversation with others too that public golf should be 14 hole courses and 18 holes reserved for 'tour courses' or country clubs. Many of them agreed because 14 holes is the 3-ish hour mark when playing in a foursome--that's typically where the slog begins for a lot of amature golfers to finish 18 and stay engaged especially when your not playing well.

 

 

With golf it's usually not the overall time, it's that when it takes forever it's because everyone or most everyone in the group is hitting poor shots, everyone or most everyone in at least one or two groups in front of them are doing the same, or because the course is trying to wring every dollar out it can and sending groups 7 or 8 minutes apart instead of something reasonable. Courses have just become too crowded in most cases for bad golf--or even reasonable pace of play--to be the norm. 5 hours of bad play or 5 hours of slow play will wear almost anyone down.

 

I agree fewer holes would maybe make for better days when someone can't hit a decent shot for the life of them, but 15 holes or 18 holes constantly waiting on the tee or in the fairway is still going to be tiresome. It would be great if there were more executive-style courses in terms of length and difficulty that the average golfer had access to, but there's almost nothing like that being built and I don't know if enough people would admit that's what they need and play them enough to keep them open if they popped up. Even a lot of the munis that have closed were really too much for many who played them because they didn't have tee boxes at short enough yardages to make them reasonable for a lot of golfers.

 

Some of the groups of older guys I've played with take 3 to get on to most of the Par 4s from the forward Men's tees, or at best their longest hybrid to get on in 2 if they're lucky. I'd imagine courses that have redone their markers and no longer designate the forward tees with red or as the Women's/Junior's do better in that regard because gents won't feel badly for playing from where the women & kids do if they don't have to think of it that way.

[akronswitness]

46 minutes ago, PedronNiall said:

With golf it's usually not the overall time, it's that when it takes forever it's because everyone or most everyone in the group is hitting poor shots, everyone or most everyone in at least one or two groups in front of them are doing the same, or because the course is trying to wring every dollar out it can and sending groups 7 or 8 minutes apart instead of something reasonable. Courses have just become too crowded in most cases for bad golf--or even reasonable pace of play--to be the norm. 5 hours of bad play or 5 hours of slow play will wear almost anyone down.

 

I agree fewer holes would maybe make for better days when someone can't hit a decent shot for the life of them, but 15 holes or 18 holes constantly waiting on the tee or in the fairway is still going to be tiresome. It would be great if there were more executive-style courses in terms of length and difficulty that the average golfer had access to, but there's almost nothing like that being built and I don't know if enough people would admit that's what they need and play them enough to keep them open if they popped up. Even a lot of the munis that have closed were really too much for many who played them because they didn't have tee boxes at short enough yardages to make them reasonable for a lot of golfers.

 

Some of the groups of older guys I've played with take 3 to get on to most of the Par 4s from the forward Men's tees, or at best their longest hybrid to get on in 2 if they're lucky. I'd imagine courses that have redone their markers and no longer designate the forward tees with red or as the Women's/Junior's do better in that regard because gents won't feel badly for playing from where the women & kids do if they don't have to think of it that way.

 

That's very true about pace. 7-8 min splits work if everybody on the course is a good golfer. However, no matter how far you hit or how good you are playing--you can only play as fast as the slowest group on the course. When courses are jamming 15 groups on the same 9 holes, somebody is going to be playing poorly or slow and logjam the entire pack behind them. Pulling up on a tee box and seeing a group waiting in the fairway for a group on the green putting is common now. 2-3 groups on every hole. One on the tee, one in the fairway, one on the green. Everybody waiting.

 

I'm not sure if this follows your same idea about executive style courses, but just have courses assign a minimum threshold handicap to their course similar to how ski resorts label all of their runs by difficulty to let the skier know what they are getting themselves into. If golf courses based on their slope, yardage, rating, par, cost, ect. say that their course has a 15 HCP rating--it might deter a lot of newer or lower level golfers from trying to play there and instead find a course with a HCP rating more inline with their own. The idea is people being more spread out and playing courses that fit their actual skill level so everybody can enjoy their days more while also sharing the course with golfers on the same level as they are. It would basically be like using a easier to digest and more individually applicable version of slope/rating.

 

You don't see backcountry skiers on the bunny slopes and you don't see novice skiers bombing double black diamonds--so in theory, you wouldn't see a 24 HCP golfer trying to book a tee time at a 12 HCP rated course 🤔 Golf courses would never go for it because it would mean they miss out on some business but man would it make some sense for all players. 

 

[mshills]

Here’s some other unpopular opinions….I may have posted these earlier in this thread, if so, my fault!

 

Courses are typically over-conditioned: over-watered, over-chemicaled, and especially over-bunkered. Maintaining bunkers and cart paths costs $$$$$. Embrace “scruffy.”

 

The beverage cart should be outlawed.

 

Alcohol sales at the 19th hole, not at the turn. 
 

Watching golf on TV is boring. I have it on a lot, as background “filler” when I’m doing something else. 
 

We need more match play events in the US, at all levels of the game. 

[Volnut]

6 hours ago, akronswitness said:

 

That's very true about pace. 7-8 min splits work if everybody on the course is a good golfer. However, no matter how far you hit or how good you are playing--you can only play as fast as the slowest group on the course. When courses are jamming 15 groups on the same 9 holes, somebody is going to be playing poorly or slow and logjam the entire pack behind them. Pulling up on a tee box and seeing a group waiting in the fairway for a group on the green putting is common now. 2-3 groups on every hole. One on the tee, one in the fairway, one on the green. Everybody waiting.

 

I'm not sure if this follows your same idea about executive style courses, but just have courses assign a minimum threshold handicap to their course similar to how ski resorts label all of their runs by difficulty to let the skier know what they are getting themselves into. If golf courses based on their slope, yardage, rating, par, cost, ect. say that their course has a 15 HCP rating--it might deter a lot of newer or lower level golfers from trying to play there and instead find a course with a HCP rating more inline with their own. The idea is people being more spread out and playing courses that fit their actual skill level so everybody can enjoy their days more while also sharing the course with golfers on the same level as they are. It would basically be like using a easier to digest and more individually applicable version of slope/rating.

 

You don't see backcountry skiers on the bunny slopes and you don't see novice skiers bombing double black diamonds--so in theory, you wouldn't see a 24 HCP golfer trying to book a tee time at a 12 HCP rated course 🤔 Golf courses would never go for it because it would mean they miss out on some business but man would it make some sense for all players. 

 

While I don't necessarily disagree with this take, I believe the issue is most of the golfers this would be geared towards don't have a handicap, and likely aren't even familiar with or understand handicaps. 

[akronswitness]

2 hours ago, Volnut said:

While I don't necessarily disagree with this take, I believe the issue is most of the golfers this would be geared towards don't have a handicap, and likely aren't even familiar with or understand handicaps. 

 

True, but I guess the idea would be for it to be posted clearly at every course and visible on every online tee time listing so the concept becomes more apart of the game. If it's used and promoted enough by the courses people will start talking about it more and it will become normalized which would ideally result in players wanting to figure out their handicap rating.

 

Every player has a handicap whether they know it or not, why don't golf courses have handicap ratings so people can correlate the two?

 

 

Edited January 31, 2024 by akronswitness

[jda]

Another unpopular take:  eliminate the handicap system.  It is welfare and keeps people from getting better.  I work hard to get better and others want even more from me?  They don't have to work at all to get better since they just get given stuff for free.  Isn't America all about rewarding those that work hard, are just better at things or are smarter?  Golf is the opposite.  We can all probably think of a friend or two who always wants extra strokes from you but would never give a dollar to a family in true need... but then also plenty who would.  🙂

 

If pace of play is an issue, then no money games on the course during peak play.  I find less bad golfers to be slow players.  It is all of the douchers who are playing their 50 cent game like it really matters... not picking up, reading their chip from both sides, etc.  Never conceding anything.

[PedronNiall]

9 hours ago, akronswitness said:

 

That's very true about pace. 7-8 min splits work if everybody on the course is a good golfer. However, no matter how far you hit or how good you are playing--you can only play as fast as the slowest group on the course. When courses are jamming 15 groups on the same 9 holes, somebody is going to be playing poorly or slow and logjam the entire pack behind them. Pulling up on a tee box and seeing a group waiting in the fairway for a group on the green putting is common now. 2-3 groups on every hole. One on the tee, one in the fairway, one on the green. Everybody waiting.

 

I'm not sure if this follows your same idea about executive style courses, but just have courses assign a minimum threshold handicap to their course similar to how ski resorts label all of their runs by difficulty to let the skier know what they are getting themselves into. If golf courses based on their slope, yardage, rating, par, cost, ect. say that their course has a 15 HCP rating--it might deter a lot of newer or lower level golfers from trying to play there and instead find a course with a HCP rating more inline with their own. The idea is people being more spread out and playing courses that fit their actual skill level so everybody can enjoy their days more while also sharing the course with golfers on the same level as they are. It would basically be like using a easier to digest and more individually applicable version of slope/rating.

 

You don't see backcountry skiers on the bunny slopes and you don't see novice skiers bombing double black diamonds--so in theory, you wouldn't see a 24 HCP golfer trying to book a tee time at a 12 HCP rated course 🤔 Golf courses would never go for it because it would mean they miss out on some business but man would it make some sense for all players. 

 

I do admit handicap minimums would be beautiful in that there are a lot who play who are questionable being on any range without full perimeter netting, let alone on the course. Making that happen would be a pain in the butt, though. 

 

In other threads people on staff or in contact with them at some courses have mentioned that adjusting rates upward to shift the demand curve has resulted in more course revenue and less crowding. Handicapping is a harder standard to verify, while cost keeps rounds at the right level without a lot of extra headaches. No one wants to pay more than technically necessary, but courses aren't going to simply cut down tee times and make less so a win for their bottom line makes the most sense. 

 

You'd probably be hard-pressed to find a course that's packed from first time to last that couldn't charge more, make more, and have a better pace of play. Just speaking to the most realistic fix until cities & counties help in land development for things other than super inefficient single floor strip malls, warehouses, and sprawling developments.

 

 

3 hours ago, mshills said:

Here’s some other unpopular opinions….I may have posted these earlier in this thread, if so, my fault!

 

Courses are typically over-conditioned: over-watered, over-chemicaled, and especially over-bunkered. Maintaining bunkers and cart paths costs $$$$$. Embrace “scruffy.”

 

The beverage cart should be outlawed.

 

Alcohol sales at the 19th hole, not at the turn. 
 

Watching golf on TV is boring. I have it on a lot, as background “filler” when I’m doing something else. 
 

We need more match play events in the US, at all levels of the game. 

Maybe some courses are overly manicured, but according to Golf Course Superintendents' reporting,  maintenance costs are steady or down at the vast majority of public courses from the mid 2000s until 2020 or so. Nothing suggests that's drastically changed in the other direction. That also doesn't reflect courses in arid climates such as Nevada & Arizona removing more grassy areas in favor of hardier plants that don't really need tending to. 

 

Fair if you think courses are just too gussied up, but money being spent on it likely isn't a problem except maybe at relatively exclusive privates. 

 

I'll agree with alcohol sales being reserved for the 19th hole. People playing buzzed and drunk isn't good for anyone having to be on the course at the same time as they are. 

[bobfoster]

On 10/12/2022 at 2:24 PM, Bad9 said:

 

Agree 1000%. Same goes for the garish ferrules that have become popular.

I put sparkly blue ones on my long irons the last time I re-shafted. Because they are glossy and not matte they add 5 yards or so of distance due to less drag, and cart girls ask me out on dates because they think it looks sexy and they assume it means I'm emotionally available.

 

 

 

Edited February 1, 2024 by bobfoster

[ColinKelvin]

18 hours ago, jda said:

Another unpopular take:  eliminate the handicap system.  It is welfare and keeps people from getting better.  I work hard to get better and others want even more from me?  They don't have to work at all to get better since they just get given stuff for free.  Isn't America all about rewarding those that work hard, are just better at things or are smarter?  Golf is the opposite.  We can all probably think of a friend or two who always wants extra strokes from you but would never give a dollar to a family in true need... but then also plenty who would.  🙂

 

If pace of play is an issue, then no money games on the course during peak play.  I find less bad golfers to be slow players.  It is all of the douchers who are playing their 50 cent game like it really matters... not picking up, reading their chip from both sides, etc.  Never conceding anything.

Nah - just make it that in matchplay you only get 60 or 80% of the difference, not full.  So the better player should still have the edge (in theory, unless the high man is a real bandit).

 

the beauty of the handicap system is that any two golfers can play a competitive match.  At the same time, no one thinks someone who receives 12 shots and wins 1 up is the better player.

[vtpachyderm]

(Norwegian rant)

• Teetimes before noon on the weekends or holidays should be  handicap capped at 30 for a flight - you can be 1-4 players, but the flight handicap has to be less than 30. 
• All weekend rounds are played with stableford rules i.e. if you're out of the hole, pick up and move on.

And before someone comes in and says that they've payed to play so they can choose - nope, sorry - paying is just giving you the privilege/opportunity to be able to play on that course on the courses terms, not yours.

 

Backdrop - Here we can book tee-times online, and there are no restrictions except for the total handicap for a flight (currently 54). Fair enough. But, with how short the seasons are, how crappy the weather is, and with more people taking up the game (which is great), the courses do get clogged up now with lots of beginners all week. This also has led to singles or twosomes just blocking off early morning/evening flights and making it hard for foursomes to get times i.e. there'll be a 4 singles signed up on the timesheet occupying 4 tee times...

[Foxx]

On 1/31/2024 at 12:32 PM, akronswitness said:

 

Im going to get looked at crazy for this but here it goes.....

 

I think that goes back to the burnout issue of 18 holes. For a lot of golfers 18 holes is a endurance and attention span test just as much as it is a fun skill test of your game. Doing anything for 5 hours is a looong time, regardless of how enjoyable it is for you. I love to play video games, couldn't play them for 5 hours straight. I love to eat good food, couldn't sit at a restaurant for 5 hours. I love baseball, couldn't watch a 5 hour long game without losing my mind. I love se......you get the point.

 

I think the attention span and ability to focus on any one particular activity continuously is around 3 hrs and anything more is too much of a good thing and people lose interest or become fatigued. That's why movies are 2-3 hours long, that's why sporting events are 2-3 hours long, ect. So if I played with a partner, had nobody in front of us and could play a 3 hour round of golf it would be amazing--but you spend on average 1.5-2 hours per round sitting idle not playing. A lot of people end up getting burned out by hole 13-14. Not every time but often enough for it to be noticable.

 

I've had this conversation with others too that public golf should be 14 hole courses and 18 holes reserved for 'tour courses' or country clubs. Many of them agreed because 14 holes is the 3-ish hour mark when playing in a foursome--that's typically where the slog begins for a lot of amature golfers to finish 18 and stay engaged especially when your not playing well.

 

 

 

100% agree. 3 hrs 30 tops.

18 holes is too many. Especially with the golf population boom. It's no longer realistic or manageable.

 

Everything life and golf related would run better if the course's were 15 holes. 

[smoova]

10 minutes ago, Foxx said:

 

100% agree. 3 hrs 30 tops.

18 holes is too many. Especially with the golf population boom. It's no longer realistic or manageable.

 

Everything life and golf related would run better if the course's were 15 holes. 

 

I don't disagree.  Do you think golfers would be willing to pay the exact same rate for a 15-hole round that they do for an 18-hole round?

Edited February 1, 2024 by smoova

[Soloman1]

Golf is a game not a sport.

[akronswitness]

1 hour ago, smoova said:

 

I don't disagree.  Do you think golfers would be willing to pay the exact same rate for a 15-hole round that they do for an 18-hole round?

 

Personally I do. Courses have jacked their rates to the moon since 2020 and local courses are still absolutely slammed, so I don't think turning golf from two 9s into two 7s would deter anybody because insane pricing and slow rounds sure haven't.

 

If anything they would lose some veteran golfers but again, I don't think courses care as long as they still have their Covid boom cash cow golfers showing up. It might actually work in their favor with people knowing going golfing wouldn't be such a time commitment. Going to two 7s also means going from a 4.5-5 hour round to a 3-3.5 hour round which would be appealing to some to actually go more because they can fit it into their schedules easier.

 

 

Edited February 1, 2024 by akronswitness

[jda]

6 hours ago, ColinKelvin said:

Nah - just make it that in matchplay you only get 60 or 80% of the difference, not full.  So the better player should still have the edge (in theory, unless the high man is a real bandit).

 

the beauty of the handicap system is that any two golfers can play a competitive match.  At the same time, no one thinks someone who receives 12 shots and wins 1 up is the better player.

 

If you keep giving people things for free, why would they ever work any harder to improve their situation?  I joke, but you get my point, right?

 

If we have a group within 3 to 5 of each other, I don't want or give any.  When we do this, we get everybody's best and nobody plays to a number.  Nearly everybody has a score that will be counted in their cap when we play this way.  Try it out sometime.  Have a guy who wants half his number, but we wheel... this can make you better too with no strokes even on the 1 or 2 handicap instead of them being level in most matches.

 

I guess that my point is that the handicap system discourages improvement.  My unpopular take is that a lot of people know this and a quite happy to live in this reality.

[golfortennis]

On 1/31/2024 at 1:59 AM, akronswitness said:

You don't see backcountry skiers on the bunny slopes and you don't see novice skiers bombing double black diamonds--so in theory, you wouldn't see a 24 HCP golfer trying to book a tee time at a 12 HCP rated course 🤔 Golf courses would never go for it because it would mean they miss out on some business but man would it make some sense for all players. 

 

 

The argument would be that unlike the ski slopes, a golf course has the bunny slope and the double black diamond on the same hole, you just have to choose the right run.

 

Of course that is a huge assumption that people will do so.

[Maine Golfer]

9 holes is the ideal amount of golf. Sometimes you even take a long break and do 9 again in the afternoon. 

[akronswitness]

54 minutes ago, golfortennis said:

 

The argument would be that unlike the ski slopes, a golf course has the bunny slope and the double black diamond on the same hole, you just have to choose the right run.

 

Of course that is a huge assumption that people will do so.

 

Golfers are stubborn and often think they are much better than they are. Just because they shot a 79 one time 3 years ago doesn't mean you should be playing from the tips every round now lol

Courses are setup for this sure, but a lot of courses are just hard that are not meant for high handicappers regardless what tees they play from, ya know? Tight fairways, OB everywhere, ect. You can't escape it even playing from the reds.

 

The reason skiers don't test their luck is because serious physical injury is at play when you bite off more than you can chew. The only repercussion of playing the wrong tees in golf is pissing off every player behind you while you double/triple every hole 😂 

[Mikey_HACKilroy]

On 1/31/2024 at 7:40 AM, mshills said:

Watching golf on TV is boring. I have it on a lot, as background “filler” when I’m doing something else.

It's good when you need background noise for a nap........ 😄

[Foxx]

2 hours ago, Maine Golfer said:

9 holes is the ideal amount of golf. Sometimes you even take a long break and do 9 again in the afternoon. 

 

9 is usually not quite enough for me. I routinely do 13. It's the point where the green is right near the clubhouse/carpark, and also the point I've had enough. The sweetspot lets say. After that it gets tedious and no longer fun.

Edited February 2, 2024 by Foxx

[PedronNiall]

4 hours ago, golfortennis said:

 

The argument would be that unlike the ski slopes, a golf course has the bunny slope and the double black diamond on the same hole, you just have to choose the right run.

 

Of course that is a huge assumption that people will do so.

You also stand a good chance of injury or worse on a black or double black run if you're not at that level, where as your ego is the only thing likely to be harmed playing a course beyond your wheelhouse. One is a much stronger means of deterring those who aren't ready for the challenge.

[golfortennis]

11 hours ago, akronswitness said:

 

Golfers are stubborn and often think they are much better than they are. Just because they shot a 79 one time 3 years ago doesn't mean you should be playing from the tips every round now lol

Courses are setup for this sure, but a lot of courses are just hard that are not meant for high handicappers regardless what tees they play from, ya know? Tight fairways, OB everywhere, ect. You can't escape it even playing from the reds.

 

The reason skiers don't test their luck is because serious physical injury is at play when you bite off more than you can chew. The only repercussion of playing the wrong tees in golf is pissing off every player behind you while you double/triple every hole 😂 

 

Oh I wasn't saying it was a good reason why it's different from skiing, just saying what the argument would be.

 

It's a bit like why there are seemingly more d-bags on court in tennis than basketball;  because in tennis you never cross the net, whereas in hoops you pull some crap, especially on a playground, you get that behavior beat right out of you real fast.  

[GowerND11]

On 2/1/2024 at 7:23 AM, vtpachyderm said:

(Norwegian rant)

• Teetimes before noon on the weekends or holidays should be  handicap capped at 30 for a flight - you can be 1-4 players, but the flight handicap has to be less than 30. 
• All weekend rounds are played with stableford rules i.e. if you're out of the hole, pick up and move on.

And before someone comes in and says that they've payed to play so they can choose - nope, sorry - paying is just giving you the privilege/opportunity to be able to play on that course on the courses terms, not yours.

 

Backdrop - Here we can book tee-times online, and there are no restrictions except for the total handicap for a flight (currently 54). Fair enough. But, with how short the seasons are, how crappy the weather is, and with more people taking up the game (which is great), the courses do get clogged up now with lots of beginners all week. This also has led to singles or twosomes just blocking off early morning/evening flights and making it hard for foursomes to get times i.e. there'll be a 4 singles signed up on the timesheet occupying 4 tee times...

 

 

I get it with you being in Norway and your short season. With that said, I am between an 11 and 12, and three of my buddies range from 13-17. That is clearly more than your 30 cap. But despite these "high caps" we regularly get through a round in 3:30 if others in front of us don't slow the whole course down. 

[dugue4]

High handicap != slow

 

It can be, but I have played with (and behind) tons of people who are significantly slower than me and my 17 cap.